Hall of Fame

1. 2012 Cincy 0 breaks of serve, 0 lost sets, bageled Djoker in final
2. 2012 Wimbledon. Beat Djoker and Murray back to back. I could see dropping this one down a few levels. Fed played poorly vs Benneteau
3. 2015 Cincy- see #1, except he didn’t bagel Djoker.
4. 2017 Wimbledon- wrecked Raonic and he didn’t drop a set the whole tourney. Only Borg win every set at Wimbledon in the Open Era.
5. 2017 IW. Never lost a set. Gave Nadal and Stab beat downs.
6. 2017 AO. Fed was clutch because he had nothing to lose. First person in 3 decades to beat 4 players ranked in the top 10
7. 2015 USO. Fed was great. However, Djoker was too good here. This is the last time that I figured that Fed had a chance against Djoker.
8. 2017 Halle. Fed lost 0 sets. Tommy Haas must have pissed him off
9 2017 Shanghai.
10. 2011 WTF

Legend

Surely AO 17 has to be number 1. Federer had obviously always been a magnificent player, but at what other tournament did he do anything to match beating Nadal after losing the 4th and going down a break in the 5th. Did anyone seriously think he had the will, nerve and resolve to beat Nadal in a slam final from 1-3 in the 5th?

Talk Tennis Guru

Surely AO 17 has to be number 1. Federer had obviously always been a magnificent player, but at what other tournament did he do anything to match beating Nadal after losing the 4th and going down a break in the 5th. Did anyone seriously think he had the will, nerve and resolve to beat Nadal in a slam final from 1-3 in the 5th?

Even if we assume the tired narrative that 2015 onwards Fed is the peak of his career, why is Wimbledon 2015 higher than 2017? He dropped 0 sets in 2017 while in 2015 he not only lost to Djokovic but also lost a set to Groth. Given you hold that Fed's USO 2015 run was the best of his career on the basis that he reached the final without dropping a set, why don't you do the same for Wimbledon?

Hall of Fame

Even if we assume the tired narrative that 2015 onwards Fed is the peak of his career, why is Wimbledon 2015 higher than 2017? He dropped 0 sets in 2017 while in 2015 he not only lost to Djokovic but also lost a set to Groth. Given you hold that Fed's USO 2015 run was the best of his career on the basis that he reached the final without dropping a set, why don't you do the same for Wimbledon?

Fedr lost anywhere from 4 to 6 straight games in 4 of the 7 matches (straight-setters excluded). 5 vs Melzer, 4 vs Nish, 6 vs Stan, 4 vs Rafa. Peak fedr LOL. Nearly dropped the third set to Rubin, too (saved SP at *3-5). Only the Berdych and Zverev matches were exhibition stuff, and Zverev's s&v was easy for Fed to pick apart. The Berdych demolition was by far Fed's best match of the tournament, if he maintained that level throughout I don't think he would've lost more than a set (to Nadal).

G.O.A.T.

1. 2012 Cincy 0 breaks of serve, 0 lost sets, bageled Djoker in final
2. 2012 Wimbledon. Beat Djoker and Murray back to back. I could see dropping this one down a few levels. Fed played poorly vs Benneteau
3. 2015 Cincy- see #1, except he didn’t bagel Djoker.
4. 2017 Wimbledon- wrecked Raonic and he didn’t drop a set the whole tourney. Only Borg win every set at Wimbledon in the Open Era.
5. 2017 IW. Never lost a set. Gave Nadal and Stab beat downs.
6. 2017 AO. Fed was clutch because he had nothing to lose. First person in 3 decades to beat 4 players ranked in the top 10
7. 2015 USO. Fed was great. However, Djoker was too good here. This is the last time that I figured that Fed had a chance against Djoker.
8. 2017 Halle. Fed lost 0 sets. Tommy Haas must have pissed him off
9 2017 Shanghai.
10. 2011 WTF

Put 2017 Miami right up there in the list. He had an arguable tougher draw than the AO except it's only Bo3 (Tiafoe - Delpo - RBA - Berdych - Kyrgios - Rafa). He squeaks past Nick in one of the best matches of the year in 3 hours, Rafa had the first semi with an easy match, Fed still came back on Sunday to routine Rafa in the final. His level is below AO and IW but given the draw and Miami is at the end of the hard court swing, it should be at least an honourable mention.

2017 Halle was a bit meh, he was good against Zverev but the matches prior were just standard.

Well considering they only met in two finals between then (both on clay and one in 2013) I'm not sure how significant it was. More significant was the time between their last meetings allowing Federer to come in mentally fresh.

Hall of Fame

Fedr lost anywhere from 4 to 6 straight games in 4 of the 7 matches (straight-setters excluded). 5 vs Melzer, 4 vs Nish, 6 vs Stan, 4 vs Rafa. Peak fedr LOL. Nearly dropped the third set to Rubin, too (saved SP at *3-5). Only the Berdych and Zverev matches were exhibition stuff, and Zverev's s&v was easy for Fed to pick apart. The Berdych demolition was by far Fed's best match of the tournament, if he maintained that level throughout I don't think he would've lost more than a set (to Nadal).

G.O.A.T.

Even if we assume the tired narrative that 2015 onwards Fed is the peak of his career, why is Wimbledon 2015 higher than 2017? He dropped 0 sets in 2017 while in 2015 he not only lost to Djokovic but also lost a set to Groth. Given you hold that Fed's USO 2015 run was the best of his career on the basis that he reached the final without dropping a set, why don't you do the same for Wimbledon?

Semi-Pro

I'm kinda new here as well, but he's serious. Dead serious. His agenda appears to be that players get better as they get older (for example, 35-year-old Federer is better than 25-year-old Federer, so I'm told). I have this to say in response:

Experience is a great advantage. The problem is that when you get the experience, you're too damned old to do anything about it.